The Most Important Sci-Fi Universe of our Generation

So, in a thread unrelated (or tangentially related) to Mass Effect 3, an article was linked where the author made the (IMO) ridiculous claim that:

I can't agree with this, given that the Mass Effect universe is a hash of a lot of standard space opera stuff, and doesn't really have any big ideas of its own. (Don't take this as a criticism of the game, I love me some Mass Effect)

This got me thinking, however, about what I would list as the most (big I) Important science fiction of the last 20? (is that too long?) years.

Here's the ones I came up with off the top of my head.

Iain Banks' Culture - This was the first I thought of. Few sci-fi series have such a cohesive vision of the future, and are willing to explore that society from as many different angles as these books.

Vernor Vinge's Zones Of Thought - The first book might be a little early for "this generation", but in terms of big ideas, this has it in spades.

Vernor Vinge's Rainbow's End - To me, this is actually a better view of what the world could be like in 10-20-30 years than anything more cyberpunky.

Those are three, but I keep wanting to put something by Stross or Watts on there (Blindsight would go on a list my MY most important science fiction of the last 20 years).

Anyone else have any suggestions for generation defining science fiction? You can define generation however you want.

Please expand on what you mean under Important.

I think that's my response too. "Most original" and "most influential" and "most internally consistent" and "most popular" and "most memorable" are all different ways of rating something as important, especially if it's in a "to this generation" kind of thing. Like, I find the Star Trek universe kinda hilarious, but it's still memorable, influential, and awfully popular for its generation(s). So I'm not really sure how we're comparing levels of importance, here.

The Dennis Hopper classic, Space Truckers.

Sigh, this is what happens when I post before my morning coffee. I am not really sure what I meant by important when I wrote it. (Yes, my no-coffee posts are other people's drunk posts.)

The quote was saying that the Mass Effect universe was somehow the most important science fiction universe of a generation. I disagree, for a lot of reasons.

I would say a Science Fiction universe (or any fictional universe for that matter) is important for what it says about culture at large and its own genre at the time the fiction is written. So, for example, the universe of Neuromancer and its sequals are important because the terminology and characters from that universe not only spawned the cyberpunk genre, they also shaped the words we use in the world at large.

I welcome anyone with a better definition of importance to give one. This is off the top of my head, and is kind of built on an argument of why the Mass Effect universe is NOT important. Also, the more I think about it, the more I am not sure of the choices I put up there in my own post. I thought I was keeping a good line between "I like" and "important", but I now don't think I did.

You're reading the quote wrong. He's not saying that the Mass Effect universe is the most important science fiction universe, he's saying that the totality of everything Mass Effect is, in aggregate, the most important piece of science fiction period.

It's Stargate, clearly.








Need a sarcasm font. Though I was actually a fan of SG-1.

Star Trek is the most important/influential universe. Star Wars is the most important/influential story.

Mass Effect always came across to me as a clunky attempt at Asimov-style storytelling with a B-level action game awkwardly bolted on. If it were a book, I'm certain it would be enshrined in the Horrible Book Covers thread. It's influential within the realm of video games only because it's the largest-scale sci-fi RPG in recent memory.

I'd argue that the seeds for cyberpunk were laid about twenty years previously in Samuel Delany's Nova, which if you are a sci-fi fan and it is not on your bookshelf WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU. While Gibson's work didn't exist in a vacuum - you had a lot of writers kind of contributing to the communal concept of cyberpunk in the 80s and 90s, I'd probably say that the Sprawl series defined sci-fi for its generation.

"This" generation... I don't know. My default answer for anyone younger than me is "Pokemon, I guess."

Dude, Vakarian hands ONLY HAVE 3 DIGITS!

Hmm, Alistair Reynold's "Revelation Space" Universe deserves a mention as does Hamilton's "Reality Dysfunction" universe.


For me the biggest impact that the background to a sci-fi story has is in Vinge's Zones of Thought work. That background is a huge part of why A Fire Upon the Deep and A Deepness upon the Sky are awesome classics.


As to most "influential" overall sci-fi universe of "this generation", hmmmm. If you define generation as last 20 years, I'm gonna go with the Culture by Banks. I feel like the Culture influences Asher, Stross, Reynolds, Hamilton and that whole wave of British sci-fi dudes.

I'm gonna have to pretty much agree with Nute wholesale on this one. Mind you, most "influential" or "important" doesn't necessarily mean "best rendered". People have done sci-fi a lot better than Roddenberry or Lucas (and out of six SW films, I only think two are really worth watching), but their continued influence and innovations are too massive to be ignored. Few other works have been constantly re-canonized so much and so well and so far from their creator's hands.

However, I don't think anyone can beat Sprawl for the way that both science and atmosphere are rendered into the story. Gibson's writing can become damned unwieldy at times, but in a way that begs you to take the challenge of absorbing the world.

Anyone who pedestals the ME universe is obviously sneaking into my stash. I played the heck out of them and enjoyed the gameplay (at least, what little is between cutscenes and awful dialogue) and the universe and characters have tons of potential, but it's too obfuscated by amateurish writing and clichéd storytelling (which, I appreciate, is made more difficult by the amount of story pathing involved, but forgiving these things as a game is different from justifying it as a fictional body of work).

Neal Stephenson's single book Snow Crash is far more important sci-fi to this generation than Mass Effect in just about every way that matters (I consider metrics like "total gross revenues" clearly outside what he meant). Perhaps he's thinking of generations in different terms than I am, but 20 years is generally considered part of a generation so neener neener stupid internet blahger guy. Go ask Dvorak what he thinks.

While I don't disagree, I'm not sure that Star Wars has had much of an impact outside of the sci-fi genre. It's true that Star Wars is an important series for sci-fi, but is it important to our culture outside of sci-fi? Compare this to something like 1984, which has had a smaller impact in terms of the sci-fi genre but exponentially more impact on the way we look at the world.

I guess this is a roundabout way of me saying that when I think of "important" sci-fi, I think of sci-fi that tells us something about our world or our future. I'm not sure that Star Wars does that. I always loathed Star Trek so I can't speak for that series.

Heck even the Halo games draw on it.

Star Wars isn't an important sci-fi universe, because it's fantasy. :P

I don't think I have enough information to agree or disagree with the author's point re: Mass Effect, other than to point out that it is almost certainly far too soon to tell. If you told me you knew Prince was going to be the most influential male artist of his generation after just his 3rd album, I'd think you were lying.

Spaceships = science fiction.

Swordfighting, magic, dragons, and princesses = fantasy.

Except there aren't any swords, magic, or dragons.

This may be a stretch for some, but it was a Big Deal at the time. One word: marketing. Star Wars completely changed the way film studios (and IP holders in general) approached marketing and merchandising.

Apart from all those swords, magic-using guys and dragons you mean?

I'd put forward the Warhammer 40k universe, maybe not as the most influential but as one that should be up there in the discussion.

Dragons? What dragons?

Also: spaceships, robots, and laser pistols. I think we can agree that it blended genres.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Krayt_dragon

Obi-wan Kenobi mimics it's roar to scare away the Tusken Raiders. (Not because a wobbly looking guy in a robe happened to be terrifying, as I thought for many years)

It's Science Fantasy, but it leans heavily on the fantasy. It has all the classic fantasy archetypes and follows the generic fantasy story. A young hero with a magic sword, under tutelage of the wise old master, must save the princess from the evil wizard in his tower with the assistance of a loveable rogue and then stop the evil wizard from using his ultimate weapon.

And I think crucially the 'science' is almost non-existent. Even Star Trek does a better job of trying to create things that seem like maybe they could actually exist.

Midichlorians, dude.

That's true, but not very connected to the "science fiction" aspect of Star Wars. I don't really think that the universe of Star Wars gains importance just because the movies themselves taught people how to better commercialize media products.

Maybe a bit dated at this point, but what about something like "Gattaca"? Many people argue that the movie popularized the idea of biometrics as a part of a surveillance state, and is often cited in discussions about genetics, destiny, and eugenics. Certainly those are issues that are important right now and I can't think of a more popular exploration of those issues.

e: Also, while I didn't care for the book itself, one of the stories in Cloud Atlas (the book -- I haven't seen the movie) is a pretty interesting description of an end-stage consumerist culture. I'd also argue that Super Sad True Love Story perfectly captures some of North American culture's ongoing anxieties regarding privacy, debt, and romance. Both of those books are relatively recent, and so it's hard to gauge their importance in a historical sense. Also a lot of people hate them, so YMMV.

Did anyone actually see the movie?

I don't know, but I'm not sure it matters. The question is about the importance of the "sci-fi universe", not about the quality of the work. So I think Star Trek is super cheesy garbage, but it could still be a very important sci-fi universe.

But it's not important. All those concepts had already been around for nearly an entire generation in fiction. All that Gattaca did was have pretty people trot around a crappy plot.

I dunno what to say other than just repeat what I said above: "Many people argue that the movie popularized the idea of biometrics as a part of a surveillance state, and is often cited in discussions about genetics, destiny, and eugenics." I think that is what makes it an important science fiction universe: it speaks to a current issue in a way that caused people to pay attention, and continues to be used as way of exploring those issues. I agree that it is not totally original or a great film as such, but I don't agree that a science fiction universe must be totally original or well-executed to be "important". But that's just my opinion. What do you think makes a science fiction universe important?

But he did say it, in February and everything!

The OP should probably link the correct article for this discussion:

http://www.popbioethics.com/2012/02...t-science-fiction-universe-of-our-generation/

Now you can have solid arguments to shoot down and avoid silly nonsense like

How could Gattaca be said to have popularised something if no one saw it?

Also, 1984 absolutely influenced sci-fi, and in a big way; the Orwellian vision of a dystopian society has become a cornerstone of the genre in all media, as has his vision of a surveillance state.

Star Wars technology is simply sufficiently advanced.

People didn't see Gattaca?

Madness.

Well, maybe popularized was the wrong word. This is what I'm trying to say: when people talk about biometrics, genetic-testing, eugenics, and so on, the most frequently cited cultural touchstone is Gattaca, in my opinion. The universe created by Gattaca is important because it has been taken up by popular culture in order to explore ideas and problems that confront us right now. The world created by Gattaca provides a useful way of looking at the present and future. That's what "importance" means to me in terms of science-fiction.

I agree, and I didn't mean to imply that 1984 didn't influence sci-fi.

Red Dwarf.

The Truman Show!

If the "of our generation" criterion is truly being applied to this, 1984, Star Trek (46 years?) and Star Wars (36 years?) are pretty much out. So what's the "most important" sci-fi universe for people born after, say, 1984?

Admittedly, this is more what I was going for, because I didn't think the importance of Star Trek/Wars could be argued that much...

I did like Nute and his suggestion of Pokemon, which makes me want to chase the kids off my lawn to a certain degree...